|
Post by boonechaser on Dec 15, 2011 10:26:20 GMT -5
I am a insurance agency owner and information I am getting from several carrier's is that deer/vehicle collsion's are down in Indiana from June,1 2010 to June,1 2011, anywhere from 10% to 20 % depending on which company you are speaking to. State Farm released a statement in October that their loss experience with deer in Indiana was down 11%. Most carrier's are advising me that automobile insurance rate's will be taking a 3%-8% premium decrease for 2012 renewal's. (3 carrier's told me that deer/vehicle collision's have been on the decline the past 2 year's) So with that said , how many of you still think our deer herd is growing??? As I have stated previousily I believe there are isolated pocket's/area's where deer herd is growing, but for most it is declining. Gonna go out on a limb and bet deer harvest number's will still go up and be "ANOTHER RECORD".
|
|
|
Post by Boilermaker on Dec 15, 2011 10:38:52 GMT -5
I'm sure it'll be another record...those insurance companies will continue to push for more deer hunting pressure even though they are paying less collision claims!
|
|
|
Post by HuntMeister on Dec 15, 2011 10:45:04 GMT -5
those insurance companies will continue to push for more deer hunting pressure even though they are paying less collision claims! Please don't take this as being critical of you...as I understand it, it is not the insurance companies pushing for reduction of our herds. This is a political issue. Folks in primarily the higher populated areas are complaining of deer / car accidents to our politicians. Insurance companies don't care as they simply raise the rates. If I am in error someone please correct me.
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Dec 15, 2011 10:49:58 GMT -5
Nope you are correct. (Most carrier's could care less.) But there are some that do lobby. FARM BUREAU being one of those carrier's in this state.
|
|
|
Post by HuntMeister on Dec 15, 2011 11:15:19 GMT -5
Nope you are correct. (Most carrier's could care less.) But there are some that do lobby. FARM BUREAU being one of those carrier's in this state. Farm Bureau lobbying is on behalf of the farmers correct?
|
|
|
Post by trapperdave on Dec 15, 2011 11:16:11 GMT -5
i believe last years record may be factual considering the early removal of crops from fields prior to season. I do NOT believe it was a record harvest due to record deer populations.
I predict a suprisingly low harvest this year.
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Dec 15, 2011 11:30:03 GMT -5
Farm Bureau Insurance has been lobbying for reduced deer number's for at least 25 year's. I worked for them 10 year's and it was a topic every year I was there.) You may be thinking of Farm Bureau Inc. which lobby's as well, but represent their member's, some not all of which are farmer's. Interesting note. You have to be a Farm Bureau Inc. member to have Farm Bureau Insurance.
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Dec 15, 2011 11:33:14 GMT -5
i believe last years record may be factual considering the early removal of crops from fields prior to season. I do NOT believe it was a record harvest due to record deer populations. I predict a suprisingly low harvest this year. It will be interesting to see what the data shows, that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by cleetus on Dec 15, 2011 12:47:12 GMT -5
I agree I think the deer herd is down on average across the state. You just don't see them like you used to and that includes road kill. Reduce the anterless permits in some of the counties!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 13:01:41 GMT -5
THANK Obama and high gas prices.
|
|
|
Post by Boilermaker on Dec 15, 2011 13:04:36 GMT -5
Well, I retract my insurance company comment! Haha, I gotta try and be a little less narrow-minded...oops
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 15, 2011 13:11:14 GMT -5
You think that just maybe the price of gas, the economy , less people driving might have some impact on that?
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Dec 15, 2011 13:25:26 GMT -5
Like everything I'm sure it's a combination of factor's. But the trend past couple year's with most of my carrier's has been less comprehensive deer claim's. This year has been way down in our 6 office's. (Southeastern Indiana/ S. Western Ohio) I will be interested in seeing harvest number's for my part of the state. My experience in the insurance industry (23 yrs.) tell's me that companies arn't going to lower premium's if it's not a trend that they expect to continue.
|
|
|
Post by practicalsportsman on Dec 15, 2011 13:25:41 GMT -5
trickle rut hasn't helped either.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Dec 15, 2011 13:39:43 GMT -5
There are always many variables that come into play when trying to analyze the statistics.
I have also heard that the high gas prices have reduced pleasure or unnecessary travel, and that the higher unemployment has reduced the number of people driving to work, both of which probably had some effect on the numbers.
Of course, those fcators should also have increased the number of meat hunters with time to shoot an extra doe or two for the freezer. And those hunters would have been doing most of the driving involved with that hunting in good deer areas in the fall. So who knows what the net effect was?
I think there has also been some conjecture that blaming a deer that "got away" after the collision has possibly become a more common excuse than it used to be when a driver finds themselves in a cornfield or a ditch.
I do think the idea that the insurance companies "don't care" about deer-car crashes because they simply raise their rates to cover the costs, is a flawed theory. The companies spend a good bit of money to try to convince us to drive more responsibly, and to push for safer roads. I suspect they would welcome any reduction in claims, even though it would result in a related reduction in rates, as noted above. It may not make a policy much more profitable, but I suspect it makes it an easier sale, especially in a tight economy.
I have also heard for many years that the Farm Bureau was the primary lobbyist for herd reduction. The fact that the same Farm Bureau represents farm interests and insurers blurs the line on which may be the more important contributing factor in their efforts, but it would appear to just add to the total motivation on their part to reduce such losses on both accounts.
Plenty of room for speculation as to the various factors, motivations, and influences. Should keep us busy during the off-season. Lots of us probably won't be as busy making venison sausages and grilling backstraps, so we'll have time to figure it all out.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Dec 15, 2011 16:30:58 GMT -5
I have believed for several years that the deer herd was not growing, and even declining. The idea of taking the annual harvest number and multiplying by 4 to get an estimated deer herd is beyond ridiculous to me. The biggest problem I see is the severe loss of habitat and the continuously growing human population. There are houses in places today that nobody would have considered putting one 20 years ago. There are more people riding atv's through the woods now and that was rarely heard of 20 years ago. People travel greater distances for work and play at higher speeds than ever before. The combination of things over the years have greatly skewed the findings on any study.
Here's my thought. Back off on the number of deer we are allowed to kill for a year or two, reduce the speed limit on interstates and highways, and set up a State crop insurance system that would pay out for damage if the farmers could prove wildlife committed the damage and they allow hunter access to help control the damage.
|
|
|
Post by hankhunter on Dec 15, 2011 16:45:13 GMT -5
Insurance Co's pay 4 BILLION in insurance claims for car/deer accidents per year. Reducing the accidents 10% equates to 400 MILLION in profits that go to the stockholders not to the people that paid their premiums. Thats why Insurance Co. lobbiest pay politicians so much money to legislate laws to eliminate the herds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 16:53:44 GMT -5
Anybody actually have ant evidence that the insurance lobby have actually asked for a smaller deer herd??? I doubt it, but post it if you can find it.
|
|
|
Post by bowhunterjohn on Dec 15, 2011 20:01:57 GMT -5
I am waiting to see what our harvest numbers look like this year. A lot of people say it will be down but I"ve stayed the same.
Anxious to see
|
|
|
Post by whitetail1 on Dec 15, 2011 20:17:04 GMT -5
those insurance companies will continue to push for more deer hunting pressure even though they are paying less collision claims! Please don't take this as being critical of you...as I understand it, it is not the insurance companies pushing for reduction of our herds. This is a political issue. Folks in primarily the higher populated areas are complaining of deer / car accidents to our politicians. Insurance companies don't care as they simply raise the rates. If I am in error someone please correct me. You are correct. Like boonechaser, I own an insurance agency and have many carriers. They don't lobby for smaller deer herds. As others have stated, if their comprehensive claims go up, they simply raise rates to compensate.
|
|